Is the Fall From Grace fatal to the Good Guy Certs?

Originally Posted by sirenofthestorm

Please point me to the thread where its proven that Karen doesn't tell the truth.

What! You have to be kidding.
Have you read this thread?

Quote me please, one thing she has posted that was true about what I posted on the other thread.

Do I really have to post the quotes all over again? Come on!!

Originally Posted by Karen Hulvey

Dude you're really pushing me here. I asked the question BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU WROTE ABOVE. Yes it DID CHANGE so quit twisting things around.

No it did NOT change. There is NO twisting around of things at all on this point. From the beginning I did not place the restriction of transactions only for votes simply because I knew it would not be possible to enforce. I also suspected that it would be more of a hindrance then a benefit for the usefullness of the certification program in general.

And you know what? Even if I had changed that stipulation, so what? I don't do my writing on stone tablets, and I certainly hope no one else thinks I do either. And all of my pencils have erasers on them as well. EVERYTHING on this site is subject to change without notice, if I determine that a change may be necessary.

Originally Posted by Karen Hulvey

WHAT DID CHANGE IS THE FACT THAT ONE DAY NONPAYING MEMBERS COULD VOTE AND THEN THEY COULD NOT VOTE. THAT IS WHAT CHANGED. Do you get it now or should I type it even slower and bigger?

I'm done with this. All you hypocrites can debate youreselves. I've made my point.

Sorry Paul, Sasheena, Sirenofthestorm, and even Webslave.

What does this second part have to do with the first?

Yes, for about a week, non paying members could vote on the certification poll. So what? Did the world end during that time because of it? If I should decide to change it so only people 21 years old or older can vote, again, so what? I can try it any way I wish to see what sort of change it may make in the overall results. There is no guidebook that came with this. I have to try things by trial and error, and by the seat of my pants. And so I say again, this particular point has absolutely nothing at all to do with anything concerning actual business transactions being a requirement to vote.

So, which of the two points mentioned above have you actually made with your statements? Sorry, but I just don't see the point of either one of them, much less that you made your point.

Will someone please explain to me what exactly this pissing duel is all about? Everyone appears to be trying to make a point, unfortunately, everyone is making a different and unrelated point from everyone else.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Will someone please explain to me what exactly this pissing duel is all about?

Yes, Rich. Karen still has a bee in her bonnet over the NERD/venomoids thread and has decided we are all hypocrites. And she has moved her venom over to this thread since she can no longer post it on the one that is locked.

Dennis, did I miss anything salient?

Originally Posted by shrap

Whitney,

Who defended him? WHO? EVERYONE was shocked that it happened but not one person defended him or his actions once the evidence was in place. NOT ONE. You should quit drinking that kool-aid they serve over at TRR. It is completely distorting your ability to see reality and think for yourself.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...7&postcount=25
He did not admit guilt outright in post 24, but I have a migraine and I simply am not going to read through that thread again to pinpoint exactly where he says it explicitly. He does begin fostering doubt in his actions in post 24, and if you want to quibble over the semantics of it, fine. I'm sorry I am not stating everything in explicit terms and defining each word as I go along. I think there are plenty of intelligent adults here who can read contextual meaning into words here as easily as they can on the BOI.
And not that you really care but do I get along with everyone at that board? heck no. will everyone on a board ever get along? heck no. I frequent several different boards but that's not relevant, right? Only the one that you happen to dislike?

Again about NERD. I do not know what happen after my last post in that thread, because once he said it was not his problem to back up his accusations I lost all interest in hearing anything else he had to say and did not return to the thread.

And personally, I do not care if it is NERD, New Breeder On The Block, or my own flesh and blood. I call a spade a spade. Right is right and wrong is wrong, who you are does not have any effect on that. I have not talked to or seen one of my brothers in almost three years. He lives 15 minutes away. He is a scumbag and can't be trusted. I won't have anything to do with him. So do not sit there and tell me that "because it is NERD......". No one else gives a crap who it is either...

You know where the thread is, but I'll summarize. Kara admitted it was a NERD event. So, the context was established, and NERD was freehandling hots with the public. To me, that is more offensive than mislabelling a thread. But hey, that's just me. Despite that fact, unfortunately most of the posts were about how the thread could have gotten off to a better start. Yes it should have, but again I think the pictures stand alone and speak for themselves. Someone is freehandling venomous snakes and letting children touch them and stand within striking distance. Whomever it is, should be ashamed and apologize to the entire community for their irresponsible behavior. That is not a "I think you should do such and such because its my moral imperative" situation. Putting kids at risk for accidental envenomation or infection due to a deep bite shouldn't be a matter of perspective. There are simply lines that everyone acknowledges shouldn't be crossed, and blatantly endangering kids is one of them. I thank god no one got tagged at that function.

yet you have no REAL evidence of any of it because none of it is true. It is just what you WANT to be true. You really need to learn to tell the difference.

No, of course I don't want it to be true. I want to believe that all people are basically good. I know that's not the reality, no one is perfect or good at all times, but for cripessakes there is something really wrong with people who think that fair use of copyrighted materials and not being a paragon of debate school clearly articulating your thoughts in each and every post is MORE OFFENSIVE than freehandling hots. I'm sorry Rich, I really tried not to make any of my posts in this thread exclusively about the NERD thread, but I am not the one who mentioned it by name again.

And again Rich, I think Karen is trying to make the point that it SEEMED related. You say it wasn't. That doesn't preclude someone from making the assumption that they are in fact related, since they followed a chronology that has already been laid out here ad nauseam.

Whitney,

You are the one playing symantics here. You are the one trying to twist the reality of the situations so it fits snuggly inside your conspiracy theory. I am done repeating myself. Good luck on finding your invisible 6 foot rabbits.

Originally Posted by Jim O

Yes, Rich. Karen still has a bee in her bonnet over the NERD/venomoids thread and has decided we are all hypocrites. And she has moved her venom over to this thread since she can no longer post it on the one that is locked.

Dennis, did I miss anything salient?

No, I think that will about cover it. Except for the willful distortion of facts to lend a hand in her opinion.

So nobody defended him? Or were you just disappointed that he wasn't repeatedly bashed to smithereens by every member on Fauna?

Originally Posted by PaulSage

So nobody defended him? Or were you just disappointed that he wasn't repeatedly bashed to smithereens by every member on Fauna?

I'm sorry Paul. Now I am lost. Who are you addressing?

I still haven't read that entire NERD thread, and probably never will, either. But I have scanned through it. It probably was a good thing that the thread was originally posted when I was away from this site at the time. Otherwise the original poster would have gotten warning points from me for posting a BOI topic outside of the BOI. The thread would also have gotten deleted because the poster (crazycorn) was not a paid member, and that would have precluded my being able to move it into the BOI. In my opinion, the thread raised an ethical question, and as such, it should have been a BOI issue, not a general discussion topic as it was presented.

Like I said, probably a good thing. Want to bet that screams of bias because that thread had been deleted would be echoing far and wide? Something along the line that I was protecting NERD or something of that sort, I'll bet. Or am I biased towards the poster because I did not assess the warning points, and have not done so retroactively?

This "bias" thing is a tough one to avoid, eh?

Were the moderators biased because they did nothing about it? It probably looked like a hot potato to them and they didn't know WHAT to do about it in my absence.

But call me dense if you like, but I still don't see what the connection is with that NERD thread and (1) the accused changing of the rules about business transactions, and/or (2) the period of time when non-paying members could vote in the BOI GGC section when I was on my 1 week "sabbatical". Is that what this is really all about? Will someone just connect the dots for me?

Originally Posted by WebSlave

But call me dense if you like, but I still don't see what the connection is with that NERD thread and (1) the accused changing of the rules about business transactions, and/or (2) the period of time when non-paying members could vote in the BOI GGC section when I was on my 1 week "sabbatical". Is that what this is really all about? Will someone just connect the dots for me?

Simple. She has a conspiracy theory.We all play different roles in it..